User talk:Redrose64/unclassified 17: Difference between revisions
m Archiving 2 discussion(s) from User talk:Redrose64) (bot |
m Archiving 3 discussion(s) from User talk:Redrose64) (bot |
||
Line 87: | Line 87: | ||
[https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3A136.148.219.118&type=revision&diff=747817962&oldid=747811251 Clearly unintentional] -- people do make mistakes, surprisingly. —[[User:MelbourneStar|<b style="color:#E22">Mel</b><b style="color:#F20">bourne</b><b style="color:#F73">Star</b>]]<font color="#FF9F00">☆</font>[[User talk:MelbourneStar|<sup style="color:#407">'''''talk'''''</sup>]] 15:23, 4 November 2016 (UTC) |
[https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3A136.148.219.118&type=revision&diff=747817962&oldid=747811251 Clearly unintentional] -- people do make mistakes, surprisingly. —[[User:MelbourneStar|<b style="color:#E22">Mel</b><b style="color:#F20">bourne</b><b style="color:#F73">Star</b>]]<font color="#FF9F00">☆</font>[[User talk:MelbourneStar|<sup style="color:#407">'''''talk'''''</sup>]] 15:23, 4 November 2016 (UTC) |
||
== Railway accident == |
|||
At 19:01, 26 September 2016, You deleted someone's entry about a railway accident. It only took me a few seconds to find a reference for it :-- |
|||
http://www.railwaysarchive.co.uk/eventsummary.php?eventID=127 |
|||
Can you please try to correct and improve other folks' contributions, instead of destroying them ? |
|||
Also, I put an entry in the Talk page about an accident in 1838 :-- |
|||
[[Talk:List_of_rail_accidents_in_the_United_Kingdom]] |
|||
Perhaps you would like to make a précis and table entry for that ? ; but if you can't improve it, leave it as it is. |
|||
[[Special:Contributions/78.147.36.12|78.147.36.12]] ([[User talk:78.147.36.12|talk]]) 03:04, 6 November 2016 (UTC) |
|||
:There is far too much [[WP:MADEUP|made-up crud]] and outright [[WP:HOAX|hoaxing]] being added to Wikipedia. It is [[WP:BURDEN|your responsibility to provide a reference]], and that must be placed in the ''article''. Talk page discussions count for ''nothing'' towards the satisfaction of [[WP:V]]. --[[User:Redrose64|<span style="color:#a80000; background:#ffeeee; text-decoration:inherit">Red</span>rose64]] ([[User talk:Redrose64|talk]]) 14:57, 6 November 2016 (UTC) |
|||
== History of rail transport in Great Britain == |
|||
Hi, |
|||
Just seen your edit. Appreciate the sentiment but surely the point is that Intercity was purely a passenger service. LMS and the others were, in their heyday, primarily freight railways with passenger services as an additional, more high profile, part of the operation. You'd have to go back to the early days of the Met to find a purely passenger railway that made a profit. |
|||
[[User:Murgatroyd49|Murgatroyd49]] ([[User talk:Murgatroyd49|talk]]) 10:01, 12 November 2016 (UTC) |
|||
:What I ''didn't'' say - because there wasn't room in the [[WP:ES]] - is that [http://www.railstaff.uk/2013/12/19/the-fall-and-rise-of-britains-railways-3/ the source used] isn't what we would understand by [[WP:IS|an independent source]]. Although not a direct publication of one of the railway companies (it's a staff magazine), it's in their own interest to big-up the modern railway system (whether they admit it or not, all management watches what the workforce are saying about the company, and promotes or holds back accordingly), so the content is not going to be something that would satisfy [[WP:NPOV]] either. --[[User:Redrose64|<span style="color:#a80000; background:#ffeeee; text-decoration:inherit">Red</span>rose64]] ([[User talk:Redrose64|talk]]) 10:10, 12 November 2016 (UTC) |
|||
Fairy snuff [[User:Murgatroyd49|Murgatroyd49]] ([[User talk:Murgatroyd49|talk]]) 12:13, 12 November 2016 (UTC) |
|||
:Just as a drive by TPW point of order, the Met was never "a purely passenger railway" until the late 1960s; it carried freight services along its length right from the time it opened (initially mainly meat from West Country farms to Smithfield, and later milk from Buckinghamshire to London, as well as the usual coal, bricks, industrial rubble, parcels etc) although because their rolling stock was fairly ropey, the freight services on the Widened Lines were usually hauled by GWR and GNR locos. On the outer reaches, the Met was very much a freight company with passenger services tacked on as an afterthought, particularly on the Verney Junction and Brill branches, and on the Uxbridge route prior to their decision to build intermediate stations between Uxbridge and Ruislip. ‑ [[User:Iridescent|Iridescent]] 16:17, 12 November 2016 (UTC) |
|||
== Two-Factor Authentication now available for admins == |
|||
Hello, |
|||
Please note that [[Time-based One-time Password Algorithm|TOTP]] based two-factor authentication is now available for all administrators. In light of the recent compromised accounts, you are encouraged to add this additional layer of security to your account. It may be enabled on your [[Special:Preferences|preferences page]] in the "User profile" tab under the "Basic information" section. For basic instructions on how to enable two-factor authentication, please see the [[Help:Two-factor authentication|developing help page]] for additional information. '''Important''': Be sure to record the two-factor authentication key and the single use keys. If you lose your two factor authentication and do not have the keys, it's possible that your account will not be recoverable. Furthermore, you are encouraged to utilize a unique password and two-factor authentication for the email account associated with your Wikimedia account. This measure will assist in safeguarding your account from malicious password resets. Comments, questions, and concerns may be directed to the [[Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard#Two-Factor_Authentication_now_available_for_admins|thread on the administrators' noticeboard]]. [[User:MediaWiki message delivery|MediaWiki message delivery]] ([[User talk:MediaWiki message delivery|talk]]) 20:34, 12 November 2016 (UTC) |
|||
<!-- Message sent by User:Mike V@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=User:Mike_V/All_admins&oldid=749162175 --> |
Revision as of 04:33, 26 January 2017
This is an archive of past discussions with User:Redrose64. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Jacobo Árbenz
Hello, Redrose64 -- I just finished copy-editing Jacobo Árbenz. I went to the talk page Talk:Jacobo Árbenz and added the GOCE template. The banner shell was already there. However, I couldn't figure out how to hide the WikiProject banners, as I usually do when the list of projects starts to get long. – Corinne (talk) 04:44, 12 October 2016 (UTC)
- @Corinne: After your edit, there are now five banners. At one time, the advice in the documentation for
{{WikiProjectBannerShell}}
was that "WikiProjectBannerShell is normally used when more than two and fewer than six banners are present on the talk page, and WikiProjectBanners when six or more are present"; the main difference between{{WikiProjectBannerShell}}
and{{WikiProjectBanners}}
was that the former collapsed the banners but did not hide them (it left their names and ratings visible) whereas the latter hid the banners completely. This advice seems to have been removed from the documentation, probably when the functions of the two templates were combined, producing{{WikiProject banner shell}}
. Although they were merged some months ago (see Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2016 January 27#Template:WikiProjectBanners), the combined template doesn't detect the quantity of banners automatically, but provides the|collapsed=
parameter to control visibility, so you need to use|collapsed=yes
to force all to be hidden. --Redrose64 (talk) 08:16, 12 October 2016 (UTC)- Oh...thank you. I guess that goes right after "shell" in
{{WikiProject banner shell}}
, right? I notice, at least in{{WikiProjectBannerShell}}
, that a space is normally left after "Shell" and before the pipe. Should that space be added before the pipe after the last word (Shell, shell, Banners) in each one of those templates? – Corinne (talk) 15:23, 13 October 2016 (UTC)- It's just a normal named parameter; for the
{{WikiProjectBannerShell}}
template it would typically be placed after the template name but before the parameter|1=
like the|blp=yes
parameter. Spaces around the pipe and the equals sign are ignored, therefore optional, and so all of the following are equally valid:or any combination of those - there are 32 possibilities, I didn't list them all. It can go also in either of two places: in the first line as just described, or the last line can be altered from{{WikiProjectBannerShell|collapsed=yes|1= {{WikiProjectBannerShell |collapsed=yes|1= {{WikiProjectBannerShell| collapsed=yes|1= {{WikiProjectBannerShell|collapsed =yes|1= {{WikiProjectBannerShell|collapsed= yes|1= {{WikiProjectBannerShell|collapsed=yes |1=
to}}
all these spaces are again optional. --Redrose64 (talk) 16:16, 13 October 2016 (UTC)| collapsed = yes }}
- O.K. Thank you for explaining. – Corinne (talk) 16:45, 13 October 2016 (UTC)
- It's just a normal named parameter; for the
- Oh...thank you. I guess that goes right after "shell" in
engrailed (gene)
Redrose64, shouldn't the formatting of the title of an article that follows "Talk:" at the top of an article's talk page match the formatting of the title at the top of the article itself? I've come across an instance where they do not match, and I've tried to explain it to another editor, but perhaps I failed to make myself clear. Or perhaps I'm wrong about my assumption. See User talk:Apokryltaros#engrailed (gene). (Note something I have just learned. This is one of many words that, when in lower case and italicized, it is a gene and when in Roman font and capitalized it is a protein. See User talk:Corinne#Evolutionary developmental biology, Item 6.) You can reply here or there. – Corinne (talk) 13:59, 16 October 2016 (UTC)
- Not necessarily. Replied there. --Redrose64 (talk) 20:20, 16 October 2016 (UTC)
Signature template
Hi Redrose64, I recently had a conversation with a user who is inadvertently using a signature template (discussion here). He does not seem to understand Transclusions of templates and parser functions in signatures (like those which appear as
. Though the other strange part of his reply is that he seems to suggest that his signature has not changed in years, and there was a point when his signature did not transclude {{trim}}, see Special:Diff/693971980. Any advice? I suppose I could bring this to WP:VPT in case someone know how the template just happens to appear in the signature without it being in the field as the user essentially claims. Thanks, — Andy W. (talk) 02:02, 18 October 2016 (UTC) amended 02:20, 18 October 2016 (UTC)
{{User:Name/sig}}
, for example) are forbidden for the following reasons
- Ahh... {{font color}} is being substituted into his signature, but not recursively substituted all the way, and the timing is just right. I believe I fixed the template issue. Apologies if this was noise — Andy W. (talk) 02:41, 18 October 2016 (UTC)
Railway station routebox - where should it be placed?
I have noticed that many railway station articles now have their routebox placed at the foot of the page, beneath the "External links" heading and the associated links. For example Cold Norton railway station. To me this does not look right, but I recall (and cannot now find) editors referring to guidelines that navboxes should be at the foot of an article. Where are those guidelines, and is the Cold Norton example the correct and intended implementation? Efficacy (talk) 19:22, 19 October 2016 (UTC)
- Routeboxes are not navboxes, they are more akin to succession boxes. As such, they may be placed at the bottom of the article, or they may be placed at the bottom of a related section, such as one describing the services from that station. --Redrose64 (talk) 20:09, 19 October 2016 (UTC)
Thank you, I suspected what you described might be the case. — Robert Greer (talk) 00:57, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Alive and kicking
It's been a long journey and nearly 3 years since seeing you at the Four Candles... Went down for a protracted period with cancer of the oesophagus but things a much better now and looking to get back to article creation so would like to meet up again sometime soon. Unfortunately we move in a couple of weeks from one side of Wokingham to the other so going through a busy period. Also, if I have failed to pick up on the Talkbox facility you can email me at (Redacted). I have a lot of updating on Wiki to do and some new articles but lack of recent activity is a handicap so a refresher would be of great help. Look forward to hearing from you and all the others in the Oxford area. Kind Regards.... G.GeoffH 112SU (talk) 12:12, 23 October 2016 (UTC)
- @GeoffH 112SU: sorry to hear that. Oxford meetups continue to be third Sunday of the month, except December as it's too close to Christmas. Next is 20 November 2016 --Redrose64 (talk) 12:21, 23 October 2016 (UTC)
British and American English
Hello Redrose64. I note that you have performed a total 'undo' on my recent edits, citing "rv changes from British to American spelling", which rather surprised me since I am of English descent and born and raised in Kent, where I remember seeing Merchant Navy locomotives running and where I attended a grammar school in the 1950s. I presume that you have objected to my spellings of 'ageing', 'riveted' and 'riveting', but the Complete Oxford English Dictionary shows all of these as the generally preferred spellings in British English. Furthermore, your 'undo' has also undone edits which were minor corrections of grammar or punctuation, the correctness of which can be verified from any authoritative British English source. Blurryman (talk) 22:31, 25 October 2016 (UTC)
- Hm, my OED
- Pearsall, Judy, ed. (1999). The Concise Oxford Dictionary (Tenth ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press. ISBN 0-19-860259-6. LCCN 99020834.
{{cite book}}
: Invalid|ref=harv
(help)
- Pearsall, Judy, ed. (1999). The Concise Oxford Dictionary (Tenth ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press. ISBN 0-19-860259-6. LCCN 99020834.
- lists both "aging" and "ageing" (at my school the former was preferred); but it does indeed give "riveted"/"riveting" without variants. These two seem unusual when other participles (e.g. travelled/travelling) double the last consonant.
- Anyway, I've undone. --Redrose64 (talk) 22:56, 25 October 2016 (UTC)
Moving Abellio Greater Anglia to Greater Anglia (train operating company)
Hi Redrose64 (and anyone else who wants to have input! In particular, pinging Mjroots as another admin i've had help with in the past on UK railway articles) - I've closed the RM discussion at Talk:Abellio Greater Anglia and moved the article to Greater Anglia (train operating company) as per consensus. It would just be good to have another couple of sets of eyes who are active in the area of UK transport to make sure I haven't missed any references/non free image use rationales (incidentally - is there a way of checking these without clicking every image on the page?) when carrying out the move, as I've not done one on this scale for a while. Thanks! Mike1901 (talk) 10:28, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
- @Mike1901: You don't need to click all the images. Use "What links here" on the old name, and restrict it to File: namespace, as in Abellio Greater Anglia and Greater Anglia. Compare Greater Anglia (train operating company). --Redrose64 (talk) 19:59, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
model railways sources
hello, i know we have been clashing but i wish to talk to you about sources relating to products, if a product is in the development page and has a news article about the product on bachmann or a retailer website such as hattons would you accept it and let it be up until it can be replaced as i feel people should be informed about the product and a primary source is quite reliable on what products they are going to make, sorry Teabagishere (talk) 16:29, 1 November 2016 (UTC)
- @Teabagishere: Neither of them is independent. As shown at WP:3PARTY,
So Bachmann's own website is a first-party source (inadmissible); that of Hatton's (who will retail the product) is second-party (barely admissible). What we need are writeups from such respected magazines as Railway Modeller, Model Railway Journal or Model Rail. These are third-party sources.Every article on Wikipedia must be based upon verifiable statements from multiple third-party reliable sources with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy. A third-party source is one that is entirely independent of the subject being covered, e.g., a newspaper reporter covering a story that they are not involved in except in their capacity as a reporter. The opposite of a third-party source is a first-party or non-independent source. A first-party, non-independent source about the president of an environmental lobby group would be a report published by that lobby group's communications branch. A third-party source is not affiliated with the event, not paid by the people who are involved, and not otherwise likely to have a conflict of interest related to the material.
- But if you "feel people should be informed about the product", you should be very careful that you are not in breach of WP:NOTADVERTISING or, worse, WP:SPAM. --Redrose64 (talk) 16:40, 1 November 2016 (UTC)
- if i use a temporary source such as the bachmann websites for the announcments of products with a note they will be changed when sources permit will you leave them up, even though bachmann is a primary source they do not sell the products on there site and the news articles have no links to other sitesTeabagishere (talk) 16:44, 1 November 2016 (UTC)
- i am asking this in relation to the LNWR coal tank locomotive which only has news announcments on bachmannTeabagishere (talk) 16:46, 1 November 2016 (UTC)
- What part of WP:3PARTY allows primary sources to be used as "a temporary source"? --Redrose64 (talk) 19:09, 1 November 2016 (UTC)
An article without third-party sources should not always be deleted. The article may merely be in an imperfect state, and someone may only need to find the appropriate sources to verify the subject's importance, this part essential allows it to be used as a temporary source until a third party of more appropriate source is found Teabagishere (talk) 23:26, 1 November 2016 (UTC)
Problamistic User Uanfala
It had been extended edit war by Uanfala [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] .
- Despite nearly 10 Wikipedians not agreeing with his views on talk pages of effected Talk pages.
- He cherry picks and tries to define dialects in to Language.
- Wikipedia is not a dictionary.
- Wikipedians can not cherry pick.
- Wikipedians can not impose a point a view.
- Wikipedians move with consensus.
- Wikipedia is an informational project. It can not misguide about language hierarchy.
- Only standardisation of few dialects can not make them language. However few follow this rule for defining Hindko Saraiki Potwari as language. He cherry pick those.
- Even those "few" along with "opposite others" have details whether "Explicit" or "Implicit" which demonstrate a common hierarchy Language Family: Indo European, Branch: Indo Iranian, Sub branch: Indo Aryan, Macro Language: Punjabi, Language: Western Punjabi, Dialects: Potwari Hindko Saraiki and many others, Sub dialects: North Hindko South Hindko.
- All such linguistic sources are mentioned / added by many wikipedians.
- If we accept Uanfala version of "cherry pick" and "Defining" then we will end up with a dilemma mentioned by User Flipro on this move request for 30 odd Punjabi dialects [6].
Time to report User Uanfala for topic ban for Cherry picking, Forum shoping, Edit warring, ignoring talk page consensus on western punjabi diffrent dialect talk pages. Please you being a registered senior editor start the proceeding for Topic Ban and violation of 3Rs. 39.60.232.41 (talk) 01:37, 2 November 2016 (UTC)₯€₠€₯
- The above message was also posted on the talk pages of several other users, and it has already received responses on Andy Wang's and on Paine Ellsworth's. – Uanfala (talk) 10:08, 2 November 2016 (UTC)
- I saw it at User talk:Paine Ellsworth before I saw it here. I shall ignore it, as it wasn't posted to a proper noticeboard but instead went against WP:CANVAS. --Redrose64 (talk) 12:07, 2 November 2016 (UTC)
Re
Clearly unintentional -- people do make mistakes, surprisingly. —MelbourneStar☆talk 15:23, 4 November 2016 (UTC)
Railway accident
At 19:01, 26 September 2016, You deleted someone's entry about a railway accident. It only took me a few seconds to find a reference for it :-- http://www.railwaysarchive.co.uk/eventsummary.php?eventID=127 Can you please try to correct and improve other folks' contributions, instead of destroying them ?
Also, I put an entry in the Talk page about an accident in 1838 :-- Talk:List_of_rail_accidents_in_the_United_Kingdom Perhaps you would like to make a précis and table entry for that ? ; but if you can't improve it, leave it as it is. 78.147.36.12 (talk) 03:04, 6 November 2016 (UTC)
- There is far too much made-up crud and outright hoaxing being added to Wikipedia. It is your responsibility to provide a reference, and that must be placed in the article. Talk page discussions count for nothing towards the satisfaction of WP:V. --Redrose64 (talk) 14:57, 6 November 2016 (UTC)
History of rail transport in Great Britain
Hi,
Just seen your edit. Appreciate the sentiment but surely the point is that Intercity was purely a passenger service. LMS and the others were, in their heyday, primarily freight railways with passenger services as an additional, more high profile, part of the operation. You'd have to go back to the early days of the Met to find a purely passenger railway that made a profit.
Murgatroyd49 (talk) 10:01, 12 November 2016 (UTC)
- What I didn't say - because there wasn't room in the WP:ES - is that the source used isn't what we would understand by an independent source. Although not a direct publication of one of the railway companies (it's a staff magazine), it's in their own interest to big-up the modern railway system (whether they admit it or not, all management watches what the workforce are saying about the company, and promotes or holds back accordingly), so the content is not going to be something that would satisfy WP:NPOV either. --Redrose64 (talk) 10:10, 12 November 2016 (UTC)
Fairy snuff Murgatroyd49 (talk) 12:13, 12 November 2016 (UTC)
- Just as a drive by TPW point of order, the Met was never "a purely passenger railway" until the late 1960s; it carried freight services along its length right from the time it opened (initially mainly meat from West Country farms to Smithfield, and later milk from Buckinghamshire to London, as well as the usual coal, bricks, industrial rubble, parcels etc) although because their rolling stock was fairly ropey, the freight services on the Widened Lines were usually hauled by GWR and GNR locos. On the outer reaches, the Met was very much a freight company with passenger services tacked on as an afterthought, particularly on the Verney Junction and Brill branches, and on the Uxbridge route prior to their decision to build intermediate stations between Uxbridge and Ruislip. ‑ Iridescent 16:17, 12 November 2016 (UTC)
Two-Factor Authentication now available for admins
Hello,
Please note that TOTP based two-factor authentication is now available for all administrators. In light of the recent compromised accounts, you are encouraged to add this additional layer of security to your account. It may be enabled on your preferences page in the "User profile" tab under the "Basic information" section. For basic instructions on how to enable two-factor authentication, please see the developing help page for additional information. Important: Be sure to record the two-factor authentication key and the single use keys. If you lose your two factor authentication and do not have the keys, it's possible that your account will not be recoverable. Furthermore, you are encouraged to utilize a unique password and two-factor authentication for the email account associated with your Wikimedia account. This measure will assist in safeguarding your account from malicious password resets. Comments, questions, and concerns may be directed to the thread on the administrators' noticeboard. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:34, 12 November 2016 (UTC)